More Info

Season 2, Episode 6 Sharks: Category:

Commissions earned from Amazon links.

Share Product

1.00 Stars - 2 reviews for EcoMowers

  1. Tristram Coffin

    This product had one major defecit coming into the “Shark Tank,” and unfortunately continues in the marketplace without addressing this huge issue. Ecomower entered the market without distinct unique benefits to consumers. At the time, it appeared that the intended position in the marketplace was predominantly focused on environmental concerns. Secondarily, as having am inherent performance benefit due to its design eminently need for sharpening.

    There is no doubt that such a weak distinction amongst push mower brands crested a huge challenge in terms of establishing a strong value proposition. The brand name itself also fails to underscore a meaningful connection to the inherent feathers and benefits of the product. I noticed, however, they’ve modified/ammended naming to more directly bring affection to the apparently unique blade design, which is certainly more meaningful than just connecting with the worn-out, genetic “ecological” aspect of the category. Ultimately, they’ll need to rethink the brand name more thoroughly if they expect to have any chance of success.

    It seems that since 2011 after Shark Tank, the market has seen more than a few direct competitors emerge. Fiskars, the Scandinavian based company, seems to present the biggest challenge fir Ecomower, as their product appears to have eliminated Ecomower’s primary value proposition by developing a “self-sharpening” design, thus requiring costly and time consuming visits to have the mower serviced. Additionally, according to scant customer reviews, Ecomower often received criticism about the product’s sub quality mowing performance, said to require multiple passes yet still resulting in “choppy, hacked-up grass” instead of the smooth and even lawn you can get using less expensive brands.

    In Summary;
    1) Weak brand name
    2) Weak unique selling proposition, easily challenged
    3) Too expensive
    4) Mixed, diluted brand positioning. Brand name focuses on “environmental” social connection, assuming there exists strong consumer affinity, which is questionable. The website highlights “the movement” suggesting the product is directly connected to, and sensitive to, an existing mass of “activist oriented” consumers, yet there is no indication that such interest exists. This apparent disconnect epitomizes a major fault in understanding consumer motivation and values associated with this category.

    As a brand and product, I rate Ecomower at 2 STARS.

  2. sherly

    it sucked

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *